T-350 Intermediate clutch stack clearance - Page 2 - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Transmission - Rearend
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 03-02-2013, 03:25 PM
joshp83's Avatar
owner of Prices Garage
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: west virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 315
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 23 Times in 23 Posts
i agree with Crosley use the thicker steels and the wave plate

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 03-02-2013, 09:54 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 22
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Would double stacking 2 steel plates be such a bad idea?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 03-03-2013, 11:23 AM
Crosley's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last wiki edit: T-350 rebuild tech
Last journal entry: Bar under the dash
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: ... USA
Posts: 8,075
Wiki Edits: 1659

Thanks: 324
Thanked 97 Times in 94 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimsmonte80 View Post
Would double stacking 2 steel plates be such a bad idea?
stacking steel flat plates is fine. Stacking frictions or waved steel plates is not.

I stack flat steels often in drag race transmittins for stock automatic racing. You reduce friction count in clutch packs , as eggzample = a low - reverse clutch in a T-350 or a T-200 . We run 1 or 2 frictions only. We stack up steel plates to set clearance
__________________
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 03-05-2013, 07:33 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 22
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I couldn't image stacking steels being a problem if your trying to close up that much slack. If a standard steel measures .068, and your after .050 - .060 of stack clearance, my question would be, "how did you get that much slop in the intermediate stack"?
Well, this could be how. ..........I had the intermediate piston machined to .970 (thanks B&M!), which was in a 2 friction stack that originally measured 1.184 (keep in mind that .992 is the standard thickness of a 3 friction stack from GM. So I measured my current 3 clutch stack with the .970 cut piston. I tossed a extra standard steel in this stack which adds .068, plus the .050 feeler gauge measurement. .118 of total stack clearance, I could leave the extra steel in the stack and be happy with .050, but I am not. If I machine another 6 cylinder piston down to 1.026, and remove that extra steel, I should be left with .060 of stack clearance. Instead of adding extra steels, thicker steels, split cut steels behind piston, etc., I am getting my clearances cut down by just machining a larger piston. So my question now is, does shooting for .060 of clearance a safe bet? Keeping in the .050 - .070 of intermediate stack clearance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 03-05-2013, 03:41 PM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 59
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 597 Times in 546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimsmonte80 View Post
So my question now is, does shooting for .060 of clearance a safe bet? Keeping in the .050 - .070 of intermediate stack clearance.
Yes, that'll work fine.

Were (are) you using B&M's steels and frictions, when you got the too-wide intermediate clearance using the 0.970" piston, or are they from somewhere other than B&M?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 03-05-2013, 04:38 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 22
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Yes, I was using B&M's transpak kit with frictions and steels. I been meaning to call B&M and ask them why. There is a pdf file you can download from B&M http://bmracing.com/?wpsc-product=tr...0-375b-and-m38 with instruction on building and modifying your TH350. Has blueprints on machining all the clutch pistons. The forward clutch specs were perfect and the direct clutch specs were perfect, except I needed the thin forward pressure plate for the direct clutch stack to get a bit more clearance (I could have maching the direct piston some more, but I was worried that the steel plate might drop too low and bind up). I installed a hardend intermediate sprag, yet B&M never listed this as an upgrade option. I am building a street car, not a drag car. So I figured B&M's transpak should do the trick and be good up to 450hp.

Last edited by jimsmonte80; 03-05-2013 at 05:00 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 03-05-2013, 05:19 PM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 59
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 597 Times in 546 Posts
I saved a copy of the instructions from a B&M Transkit- it has the same dimensions, too. On that particular transmission I used Alto intermediate friction and Kolene steels (supplied by the owner) and didn't need to modify the "V8" piston to use them, so my thought are that possibly the B&M parts were thicker.

I wonder if B&M might have used thicker plates in the past and haven't revised the instructions. Seems sloppy on their part if that's the case, but judging by the quality of the photos in their instructions, sloppy may well fit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 03-05-2013, 06:11 PM
Crosley's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last wiki edit: T-350 rebuild tech
Last journal entry: Bar under the dash
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: ... USA
Posts: 8,075
Wiki Edits: 1659

Thanks: 324
Thanked 97 Times in 94 Posts
B&M lost their direction years ago from internal and external problems. I would not trust any instructions from them.

Even TransGo in recent years have updated many of their kits instructions for the basic 3 speed trans. Simplified and more clear diagrams

You can run up to .090 clearance in the 2nd gear clutch.

Try to keep the direct piston no thinner than .710 ... You 'may' need a thinner pressure plate for direct clutch with 5 frictions than the plate that came in the trans

The hardened 2nd gear race is likely a re-heat treated OE race. It is re-heat treated to lower the rockwell number so the race is less brittle
__________________
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 03-05-2013, 08:14 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 22
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I have done several tranny rebuilds, this would gave been my first performance built tranny. I have had good experience with B&M products in the past. Car craft magazine did an article on this transkit and it sounded great for a performance build. I am sure for what I want, it will work fine. What are the characteristics of the alto frictions vs. the borg warner frictions?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 03-06-2013, 01:54 AM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 59
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 597 Times in 546 Posts
Alto vs. Borg-Warner

IMO you can't go wrong w/any of the major manufacturers, and you'll be just fine using B-W. Kolene steels seem to take a lot w/o problems and I use them whenever I can in most any rebuild. They add to the cost but I feel they're worth it. Others might not agree and that's fine, too.

The manufacturers all offer OEM type replacements along w/heavy duty/high performance/special applications, like the Alto "red" and Raybestos Red Devil and Blue Plate. But within a particular application (stock, heavy duty/towing, hi-po, etc.) they are close to each other in performance by what I have been able to see.

Using a good auxiliary cooler is as important as most anything else for the longevity of an automatic transmission.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 03-06-2013, 05:10 AM
Crosley's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last wiki edit: T-350 rebuild tech
Last journal entry: Bar under the dash
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: ... USA
Posts: 8,075
Wiki Edits: 1659

Thanks: 324
Thanked 97 Times in 94 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimsmonte80 View Post
I have done several tranny rebuilds, this would gave been my first performance built tranny. I have had good experience with B&M products in the past. Car craft magazine did an article on this transkit and it sounded great for a performance build. I am sure for what I want, it will work fine. What are the characteristics of the alto frictions vs. the borg warner frictions?
Which material from these manufacturers? They offer more than one material friction

With proper set up on the trans and pressure, the common brown paper frictions will take over 500 horse power.

No need for Kolene steels either
__________________
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Crosley For This Useful Post:
jimsmonte80 (03-06-2013)
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 03-06-2013, 05:56 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 22
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
It has been over 15 years since I rebuilt my last tranny. And these were just OEM kits, never paid much attention to the friction material brands. I can't even remember where I got those kits. I understand that these high performance friction materials can withstand more abuse and temps, but I doubt that my car will ever see a drag strip (too far away in my state). I already have a large tranny cooler installed and had a shift kit in this tranny from before. Since I am building up the engine, I need the tranny to take the extra power. One problem I always had with this tranny was the delayed 1-2 shift, now I am trying to remedy that with intermediate clearance issues. I still have nothing against B&M, still using their holeshot convertor. But I agree that maybe they need to do some updating of their materials.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2013, 09:45 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 22
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Kudos Crosley on updating the T-350 tech build page. I like the new section on the intermediate clutch.
So now I have 2 intermediate 6 cylinder version pistons measuring about 1.175 that I will have machined down to the perfect size for .060 of stack clearnce. They both are of the later type piston that requires the spring retainier with the staked pistons. But, one has a thick solid contact edge and the other has a thinner contact edge with ribs all around the edge of the piston. Any advantage over one with the other?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 03-08-2013, 07:05 AM
rick 427's Avatar
Registered User
 

Last journal entry: The Cheetah
Last photo:
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 258
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 17 Times in 17 Posts
Solid contact surface=easy to machine down.....spaced contact surface=not easy to machine down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 03-08-2013, 07:39 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 22
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 2
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I figured that much on machining the piston. The solid one has more contact area for the wavy cushion spring to rest on, not sure if that even matters. Thanks for the reply.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Recent Transmission - Rearend posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
T-350 Low/Reverse clutch stack, 4 or 5? jimsmonte80 Transmission - Rearend 4 02-25-2013 08:23 AM
TH 400 intermediate clutch piston seal(s) scott67 Transmission - Rearend 1 05-16-2010 10:40 AM
th-350 intermediate clutch problem jeffvega Transmission - Rearend 4 03-02-2009 07:23 PM
Air checking intermediate/direct clutch? Marcus Transmission - Rearend 2 10-23-2004 02:36 PM
TH 350 Intermediate clutch clearance 1969Chevelle Transmission - Rearend 1 08-26-2003 04:34 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.